Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35417236›Full record

ArticleScience advances2022

Ecological consequences of neonicotinoid mixtures in streams.

Travis S Schmidt, Janet L Miller, Barbara J Mahler, Peter C Van Metre, Lisa H Nowell, Mark W Sandstrom, Daren M Carlisle, Patrick W Moran, Paul M Bradley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Travis S SchmidtWyoming-Montana Water Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Helena, MT 59601, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1400-0637
Janet L MillerNational Operations Center, Bureau of Land Management, Denver, CO 80225, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2292-5501
Barbara J MahlerTexas Water Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Austin, TX 78754, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9150-9552
Peter C Van MetreTexas Water Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Austin, TX 78754, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7564-9814
Lisa H NowellCalifornia Water Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Sacramento, CA 95819, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5417-7264
Mark W SandstromNational Water Quality Laboratory, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO 80225, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0006-5675
Daren M CarlisleEarth System Processes Division, U.S. Geological Survey, Lawrence, KS 66049, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7367-348X
Patrick W MoranWashington Water Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Tacoma, WA 98402, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2002-3539
Paul M BradleySouth Atlantic Water Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia, SC 29210, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7522-8606

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neonicotinoid mixtures are common in streams worldwide, but corresponding ecological responses are poorly understood. We combined experimental and observational studies to narrow this knowledge gap. The mesocosm experiment determined that concentrations of the neonicotinoids imidacloprid and clothianidin (range of exposures, 0 to 11.9 μg/liter) above the hazard concentration for 5% of species (0.017 and 0.010 μg/liter, respectively) caused a loss in taxa abundance and richness, disrupted adult emergence, and altered trophodynamics, while mixtures of the two neonicotinoids caused dose-dependent synergistic effects. In 85 Coastal California streams, neonicotinoids were commonly detected [59% of samples (

Identifiers

PMID35417236
PMCPMC9007503

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.